Strange Bedfellows ("Christians" and the ACLU) on Immigration, Cocaine, and Campaign Finance | Christianity Today

Source: www.christianitytoda...

Tom Usher wrote or added | On Arizona, the main mundane, legal issue remains "reasonable suspicion." The line in the AZ Statue is way to fuzzy, subject to wild abuse. The spiritual issue runs to who has ruined Mexico and why? The drug cartels there are a symptom of the bad-neighbor policy by the US.

As for crack versus powder cocaine, the real focus should be on why people take it in either form. What's wrong with their lives, and how can the problems be fixed? The original rationale for the difference in sentencing was price and addictiveness, but it was surely also race.

About campaign-finance reform, one person's "democracy" is another's tyranny. The rich and superrich have more voice on account of what money will buy. They have more say, and hence their "vote" is really not limited to what they do in the booth on election day (supposing that election fraud of the kind George W. Bush pulled in both of his Presidential "elections" doesn't occur). This is double bad because so much wealth, as we all know, is by ill-gotten gain – most of it frankly – the vast, vast majority. Therefore, crooks buy elections. Limiting and exposing them gives more voice to the poor – more equality in the one-person-one-vote policy. I haven't read the proposed legislation though, so I can't speak to every bit of it.

Concerning the statement that Romans 13 requires Christians to vote in coercive democracies, it's utter nonsense. Even if Paul were to have said that outright, Jesus doesn't agree. Jesus was not coercive concerning the involuntary Empire.

No part of "scripture" has been more used for evil (wars, greed, imperialism, tyranny, etc.) than Romans 13. The shift of Fundamentalists to voting is very recent in terms of the history of American elections. It really ramped up due to Jerry Falwell's so-called Moral Majority that was mixed with secularists and Jews – very anti-Christian.

Richard Cizik's civil-unions-for-homosexuals issue is about mundane, coercive democracy, not Christianity. Christians follow Jesus on marriage and divorce:

But from the beginning of the creation God made them male and female. For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and cleave to his wife; And they twain shall be one flesh: so then they are no more twain, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder. (Mark 10:6-9 KJVR)

Cizik is right on many environmental issues, but he doesn't know what he's talking about on Christ and homosexuality.

  • Subscribe
  • Tom Usher

    About Tom Usher

    Employment: 2008 - present, website developer and writer. 2015 - present, insurance broker. Education: Arizona State University, Bachelor of Science in Political Science. City University of Seattle, graduate studies in Public Administration. Volunteerism: 2007 - present, president of the Real Liberal Christian Church and Christian Commons Project.
    This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.